Review petition filed in Supreme Court challenging quashing of cheating and forgery case against former Punjab CM Parkash Singh Badal, son

Three review petitions have been filed before the Supreme Court against the Court's decision to quash a cheating and forgery case against former Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal and his son Sukhbir Singh Badal, who is also the president of the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) party. [Balwant Khera and Ors. vs Sukhbir Singh Badal].On April 28, 2023, a Supreme Court bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar had set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that had rejected a plea by the Badals to quash the case.The case against Badals was filed by one Balwant Singh Khera accusing the SAD of submitting separate constitutions with the Gurdwara Election Commission and the ECI.Khera, a resident of Hoshiarpur, had filed the criminal complaint in this case before an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in 2009.Khera's complaint alleged that on one hand, the party claimed to be a secular party and gave a declaration to abide by the principles of secularism in its constitution filed before ECI.However, on the other hand, it was contesting elections for a religious body, the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), thereby giving it the colour of a religious party, the complainant stated.The Badals and another accused, Daljit Singh Cheema, moved the Supreme Court challenging the proceedings before the magistrate. This was after the High Court rejected their plea in August 2021. The Supreme Court ruled in their favour in April. The apex court noted that the Badals had been summoned to face the trial even though none of the ingredients of the offences alleged were made out against them.The Supreme Court in its verdict opined that the Punjab and Haryana High Court ought to have quashed the proceedings. Terming such proceedings an abuse of the process of law, the Supreme Court had proceeded to quash the same.The top court also said that it had not expressed anything on the constitution of the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) party. Hence, it clarified that the proceedings pending before the Delhi High Court with respect to an order of the Election Commission of India (ECI), should not be influenced by the top court's verdict..Supreme Court quashes cheating and forgery case against former Punjab CM Parkash Singh Badal, son Sukhbir Singh Badal.The review plea filed against this April 2023 judgment has contended that the top court's judgment was erroneous. As per the review petitioner, the Supreme Court judgment in question contained glaring erroneous recordings and appreciation of allegations. Further, it is stated that incorrect ingredients of various legal provisions were applied and that there was an erroneous recording that no false documents were produced by the accused.The petitioner has claimed that several such false documents are on record, apart from a witness statement categorically admitting to the deception and fraud alleged against the Badals. Moreover, the duo had committed a series of frauds that began with a false representation of their constitution before the poll body to wrongly brand themselves secular. .The petitioner, who is the original complainant, has also highlighted that the Supreme Court had repeatedly held in various judgments that it is not for the High Court to conduct a mini-trial in such cases, as it is only required to see if a prima facie case is made out based on the material collected during an investigation.Despite this, the petitioner submitted that in its April judgment, "(the) Supreme Court has sat like a trial court and further, despite a plethora of crucial evidence against the accused, has disregarded all of it on patently erroneous grounds – by way of errors of fact and of law.".The review plea has further stated that the High Court was only required to see if there was a proper application of mind by the trial court before passing a summoning order. The Supreme Court has erroneously overlooked that the summoning order showed a proper appreciation of the material on record to form a prima facie opinion against the accused, the petitioner has submitted. The review plea filed, through advocate Indira Unninayar, has also said that the deposition of a key witness "who had held the position of party secretary in 1989 at the time of filing the false document" as well as "his candid admission to the offence of fraud and forgery" were also ignored by the Supreme Court in its April 2023 judgment.